Selling My Film Cameras for an M9 -- Wise?

helenhill said:
I would go with the M9...:eek:
and keep the Barnack & Cron ...:D

Best of Luck in making your decision

QUESTION: with re: to what your Clients Expecy...what is the ratio between Film & Digital output ??
Click to expand...


Wait a minute...you have a D700 for your primary camera. What on earth do you need a $7000 camera? Backup? Save the money and buy a second D700 for seamless versatility.

Got more money or gear than you need? Buy the M9. Simple.:)

Hobbies are much more expensive than professional endeavors, it seems.:p
 
That was my biggest regret: not holding on to the glass. You'll love yours on your M9 and you can always get back into film rather quickly with a user M body
Click to expand...


That's the great part I reckon!
 
Translation: Should I sell a system that can feasibly create images for decades, for one tool that will be obsolete within 3 years?

If you're making a living from it, and insist on going digital (which is entirely reasonable when paying the bills is at stake) then at least go for a 5D Mark II.

Otherwise keep a good (great, even) kit, learn to soup your own film and get good at scanning.
 
I don't think there's a lot to lose here for Vince ... the M9 can always be sold if he ultimately doesn't like it and M bodies used are never going to be worth any more than they are currently if he decides to go back to where he started!
 
Hi Vince,

This is actually my first post on this forum, but felt compelled to respond by urging you to consider/re-consider the M8 which I find to be an amazing (not alternative to the M9) choice in this segment. I have had the choice between the two cameras and have opted for the M8 for several reasons: one, I like the metering in the M8 much more than the M9 (most do not talk of this feature), and two, I like the sensor quite a bit more as it is more filmic to me. Also, three I much prefer the lack of IR filter for how fleshes are rendered both in color and especially in B&W(I shoot almost exclusively fashion/beauty). And finally, four I find the 8000 of a second shutter particularly useful (the M9 I believe tops out at 4000) when using the Noctilux which I shoot almost exclusively and always wide open (yes with ND's for exterior work).
Just me two or three cents,
Saverio
 
Thanks for all the replies, and I think all of this has helped immensely. As far as developing the film on my own, I pretty much gave that up about 7 years ago, and quite honestly am not really interested in going back. I'd been doing it since I was 15 (almost 30 years), and maybe the ease of using digital almost every day now for work has lulled me into a bit of laziness (okay I admit it!). Mailing my film off somewhere sounds almost as fun as driving an hour round trip to Penn Camera (not that I have anything against Penn Camera in general).

As far as the cameras that I will keep, I'll hold onto my Contaflex TLR (35mm) kit, my Hasselblad 500CM (as it belonged to my uncle), perhaps one of my Exaktas, my Leica III that I've had since 1988, and I think that might be pretty much it. We'll see if I can in fact raise the entire amount for the M9 through the sale of all my cameras.

I did think about the M8, but as I mentioned earlier, the crop factor would drive me nuts. The top shutter speed difference really doesn't matter to me personally, as I have never in my life used anything faster than 1/2000, and even at that I've probably done it twice.

The D700 is a great camera, but for me I don't want a second one, and certainly not a camera that big. Yes, I wish there was a full frame interchangeable lens rangefinder alternative to the M9, but for the time being it is what it is.

Are there any M9 users out there who have buyer's remorse? I'd be interested to hear why, if there are any.

Thanks again...
 
Last edited:
My only concerns about the M9 are the costs to have it repaired or worse to have it replaced if something happens to the camera. With my - bought used - film M Leicas that is less of a problem and I have less thoughts about using them in bad weather or areas where I have to care about safety. That said, for professional use and documentary work in color I would go for the M9 now, for only private photography and mostly BW the camera is still way to expensive.
 
maddoc said:
My only concerns about the M9 are the costs to have it repaired or worse to have it replaced if something happens to the camera. With my - bought used - film M Leicas that is less of a problem and I have less thoughts about using them in bad weather or areas where I have to care about safety. That said, for professional use and documentary work in color I would go for the M9 now, for only private photography and mostly BW the camera is still way to expensive.
Click to expand...

Gabor . I Love your sensibilities...well though out :)
xo- H
 
Vince,

Why not send your film to Chrome (now DodgeChrome or ChromeDodge) outside D.C.? They do gorgeous work and a small package dropped off at a FedEx / Kinkos in the morning is there by ground the next afternoon -- way cheaper than an M9 :D
 
I made the same move back in November of 2009. Sold my film bodies, some lenses, my Nikon kit, etc. I actually paid for the M9 that way. No regrets.

I came to the conclusion that I can only use one camera at a time with one lens, and I was using film less and less every month. I'm 100% happy with my M9. And that's my story.
 
My thoughts, admittedly, are based on (1) the fact that I'll be nowhere near able to buy something like an M9 for some time, and (2) I have little to no trouble getting my C41-based film (about all the color film I shoot anymore) souped, with quick turnaround...I even recently discovered a little lab near me that soups 35 and 120.

I'd be a bit nervous about selling off nearly all the roster for an M9 body. Not because the M9 isn't worth it (at least in the short term, it likely is), but because slotting next to the D700 seems like an odd bit of switch-hitting. On the rare occasion these days when I'm doing the hired-gun thing, I'm shooting with identical bodies (in my case, a pair of Hexar RFs) I can smoothly and quickly switch between. Not everybody works this way, but in your shoes I might just opt for a second D700 (or the like) body. If, however, you're dead-set on an M9, try not to jettison your M (or LTM) glass for one. Even ditching the MF gear, IMO, is preferable to that. At least that stuff will be cheaper to buy again. Merely my 2¢ worth.


- Barrett
 
Vince,

While I love my M9, there is something about film. That said, I'm don't amke my living from photography.

As for labs in your area, one of the best labs I've used is Chrome, now DodgeChrome, just outside of DC. Not too far from you, and would only take a day to get stuff there via priority mail. Heck, I've even sent them some things from here in New Zealand to process. www.dodgechrome.com. 120 C41 and E-6 is $7.95 per roll, B&W is $9.50.

Just my two cents worth.

Jeff
 
Buy 3000 dollars worth of M glass plus 1000 dollars worth of Nikon glass and an excellent black M4 body instead...keep the D700...it is my opinion based upon looking over many of your posts that the M9 will quickly bore you to tears. Hey you asked and I don't have a M9 let alone any Leica...I do have a bad @ss Zeiss Ikon Contaflex though! :)
 
Let's look at numbers here, since this is your livelihood.

An M-9 is a one-time investment, plus occasional maintenance. How often does a camera really need maintenance, though? It will depreciate greatly at first, take advantage of the tax code with the depreciation. You already have the glass, but you might need an adaptor.

A film camera has operating costs. You have to purchase film and have it processed. Let's assume that if you drive or mail it, total cost is somewhere between $15-20. I only get about two per 36 frames that I like. Unless your this guy and get 32 keepers per roll, you're losing 95% of that money. Your success rate is surely higher than mine, though.

Assuming you already have the Leica film body and glass, you can shoot 12,600 frames of 35mm for the price of a Leica M-9. That's a lot of film, but less than a roll a day for a year. You'll still have to scan the keepers, and $7000 later you still won't have a digital Leica M-mount. So, if you shoot enough the M-9 will pay for itself because your operating costs of the film body. If you don't adjust your prices, nor should you, you've become more profitable.

My suggestion, if a cropped M-8 isn't an option, is to wait until the M-9's start popping up on the used market. I can't see how 35mm film is profitable for photographers anymore, and the argument against it gets stronger with more megapixels available in cameras each new year. Is the M-9 going to be obsolete when the M-10 is introduced? It certainly won't make the M-9 less functional...

Medium format still has some advantages over digital, so I'd keep the Hassy. Digital backs are available for the Hassy, and the same thought process applies for it.

So, yes--I'd say a digital Leica M-8 or M-9 would be wise.
 
Last edited:
Sell all your film cameras (except that Hassy), buy the M9 and love it.

Then: Buy a 4x5, and an Olympus Stylus Epic. Both of which can be had for under a grand.

You'll get your film fix when you need grainy or ultra high resolution.
 
Vince Lupo said:
After having had a very frustrating week trying to get some film processed in my neck of the woods (Baltimore area), I'm crying 'uncle' and have decided to sell many of my film cameras to finance the purchase of an M9. My M2, M5, Robot Royal 36, Contax II, Hasselblad, screw mount Leicas, etc (I will probably hang onto my Contaflex TLR and maybe a screw mount Leica that I've had since 1988). I'm going to keep all my Leica lenses, but I've pretty well decided to do this. I just hope I'm making the right decision, but it seems that the 'photo' labs in this area are forcing me to do this, not to mention the proverbial 'writing on the wall' as far as the way the technology has been going.

So I'd like to know from those of you with an M9: Is it worth the $6995 admission price? My plan would be to incorporate it with the rest of my professional equipment, but also to use for all of my 'personal' work. It would be a secondary main camera to my D700 for the pro work, but my main camera for my personal work. I've thought of an M8, but I know the crop factor would drive me crazy, so I've settled on the M9. It's just the whole concept of spending that much money on one piece that scares me. But, it would definitely get more use than my present crop of film cameras.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts....
Click to expand...

If you are buying it for professional use, you should be able to write it off as tool. It should help a bit.

The number $7000 for digital body still does not fit into my brain, but that's just me... If you can and willing to afford this, more power to you!
 
Why not sell a piece of gear and buy the equipment to develop your own. At least to develop the film and scan. Beats the hell out of spending all those bucks for something that will be rendered "obsolete" by a new and improved model within a year. It's called taking ownership.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom